While the availability of, and access to, litigation funding has been a boon for those seeking access to justice, some industry insiders argue that reforms have not gone far enough, and that more change is needed. One area of interest is recoverability for plaintiff costs, where currently claimants still stand to lose financially in order to cover the costs of the very funding that has allowed them to access justice.
As part of a broader effort by the US Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) to increase transparency around hedge fund investing and reduce risk in the financial system, the spotlight has fallen on the activities of funds engaging in litigation financing investments. In a proposal last week, the SEC would require hedge funds and private investment advisors to confidentially disclose their litigation funding activities and spending.
The role of superannuation funds in litigation finance (specifically in funding class action claims) has been highlighted by industry insiders in Australia, who point to it as a benefit to the funds themselves and also an encouragement of good corporate governance. The recent example of HESTA, a super fund based in Sydney, taking part in a class action lawsuit against multiple financial service companies, has demonstrated both the appetite and the potential benefits of such engagements.
The extent and scope of litigation funding liability is being questioned, after a High Court ruled the funder was liable for costs predating the litigation funding agreement (LFA).
The following piece was contributed by Lillian Rizio and Max Hensen of Australian law firm, Piper Alderman.
The Full Federal Courts’ decision in Parkin v Boral Limited (Class Closure) [2022] FCAFC 47 (Parkin) confirms the courts’ power to issue pre-mediation (and settlement) soft class closure notices to group members. The decision hints at the (positive) appetite of the Federal Court in making future orders for class closure that facilitate a just outcome,[1] simplifies the assessment of quantum prior to settlement, and reduces an element of risk in funded litigation.
The International Comparative Legal Guide (ICLG) reports that at London’s International Disputes Week attorneys discussed the complicated intricacies of State-investor energy litigation. State governments are becoming more aggressive in entertaining…
